7th International Conference on Education, Humanities and Social Sciences Studies (EHSSS-17) May 2-3, 2017 at Pattaya (Thailand)

Karen Ethnoecology and Its Contributions to Ecotourism

Manasan Wongvarn, Asst. Prof. Sompong Amnuay-ngerntra

 humans and their natural surroundings and become exemplars Abstract—This paper discusses traditional ecological knowledge of of the co-existing harmony between human and nature human-forest relationship in the Karen indigenous community in (Luangaramsri, 2001). The larger society can learn a great deal northern Thailand. The study explores the values of human-forest from the indigenous people’s traditional skills in sustainable relationship, examines how this traditional knowledge is preserved in management of complex ecological systems (Chao and Hsu, the community, and learns to share it to visitors. Through in-depth 2011). The purpose of this research is to investigate the interviews and focus group discussions, the findings reveal local ways of life, perceptions, attitudes, knowledge, and values of the Karen phenomenon of indigenous ecological knowledge by examining community toward their ethnoecological identity; and in what ways the relationship between indigenous folk (the Karen) and their they can exchange the knowledge to visitors. Consequently, traditional surroundings (forest) - a source of their ethnoecological values, ecological knowledge of the Karen provides implications and and exploring the ways in which the indigenous communities contributions to ecotourism development. preserve their traditional knowledge and skills, and exchange it to visitors. Keywords—Karen, indigenous ecological knowledge, ethnoecology, and ecotourism. II. LITERATURE REVIEW

I. INTRODUCTION In recent years, the prevailing impacts of tourism on A. Ethnoecology biodiversity is calling for a paradigm shift that truly sustains the According to Casagrande (2012), ethnoecology comes from two tourist destinations, and to greater extent, the planet earth or words ‘ethnic’ which refers to human culture and ‘ecology’ world ecology. Notably, human beings are key agents of which refers to “interactions between organism and the physical ecological destruction, climate change, and alterations in environment”. Hence it focuses on the relationship between biodiversity. People take nature for granted and seem to be humans and non-human environments, and underlines what the gradually distant from the natural surroundings. That being the indigenous or ethnic people “consider worth attending to” and case, Huay Hin Lad Nai Karen community, in Wiang Pa Pao their valuable traditional knowledge and skills that “allow district, Chiang Rai province, Thailand, offers a critical humans to subsist and flourish” (Frake, 1962 in Casagrande, examination of the indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK), 2012). Ethnoecology is not merely limited to the traditional especially symbiotic relationship with the forest—the main approach to plant, animal, habitats, and other ecological source for the world biodiversity. phenomena, but rather it involves what underlines the human Karen people, the largest hill tribe, have been in northern mind that determines human behavior. Thailand and Myanmar for centuries. Their indigenous Ethnoecology stresses on the indigenous people who are knowledge, which is centered upon the preservation of the culturally, socially, and spiritually concerned with their biodiversity of the forest and ecological system, has been environments and in fact it centers on cultural memory and constructed and passed on in the forms of oral tradition for sense of place (Santasombat, 2013). In other words, the centuries (Delang & Wong, 2006). This makes their indigenous ethnoecological study helps us fathom the relationships between wisdom on human-forest relationship intrinsically interesting to culture and ecological systems or people and their environment further examine and present their indigenous insights to wider as well as “the role of community-based conservation in society. fostering and undermining socio-ecological resilience” The indigenous knowledge can bridge the gap between (Institute for Environmental Sciences and Technology, no date) and grasp the core of how the relationship originates and becomes a tool for human adaptation to nature (Trakansupakorn, Manuscript received August 9, 2014. (Write the date on which you 1997). submitted your paper for review.) This work was supported in part by the U.S. Department of Commerce under Grant BS123456 (sponsor and financial B. Indigenous Ecological Knowledge (IEK) support acknowledgment goes here). The indigenous knowledge or so called ‘local knowledge’ has F. A. Author is with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, Boulder, CO 80305 USA (e-mail: author@ boulder.nist.gov). been widely discussed (Delang & Wong, 2006). Rao and S. B. Author was with Rice University, Houston, TX 77005 USA. He is now Ramana (2007, p.129) attributed indigenous knowledge as “the with the Department of Physics, Colorado State University, Fort Collins, CO basis for local decision-making in agriculture, health care, 80523 USA (e-mail: author@lamar. colostate.edu).

https://doi.org/10.17758/EAP.EPH517022 262 7th International Conference on Education, Humanities and Social Sciences Studies (EHSSS-17) May 2-3, 2017 at Pattaya (Thailand) natural resource management and other activities in rural or intangible value of the people and place. In shorts, people and communities”. Indigenous knowledge is embedded in place come last after profit. The prefix ‘eco’ has a couple of community practices, institutions, relationships and rituals. nuance—ecological sustainability and economic benefit—or in Indigenous ecological knowledge (IEK) receives a great deal of three main concerns, i.e., people, planet, and profit (Brightsmith attention for the last two decades. IEK was also known as et al, 2008).The primary concern should be people and place traditional ecological knowledge which is an encompassed and the depth of interpretive value of the indigenous; the profit concept of uniqueness and particularity to a culture and society should otherwise derive from the interaction of the host-visitors. as well as long-standing and transmittable knowledge that Although, ecotourism brings about the economic gain for the guides human societies as to how to interact with the natural community, it may degrade the whole meaningful intact and nuclear relationship between humans and nature. milieu (Nakashima, Prott & Bridgewater, 2000). Indigenous knowledge in general is locally based, dynamic and unique to a III. RESEARCH SITE given culture or society and juxtaposed with the international knowledge system derived from academic research (Warren, A. Huay Hin Lad Nai Karen Community 1991). IEK has been affirmed to offer a process of preserving Huay Hin Lad Nai is a Karen ethnic community located in the natural and environmental milieu and has been increasingly Moo 7, Ban Pong sub-district, Wiang Pa Pao district of Chiang recognized as an important means for managing local Rai province. Wiang Pa Pao is a district bordering with Doi ecosystems and landscapes (Luangaramsri, 1996; Jiao et al, Saket and Phrao districts of Chiang Mai and with Wang Nuea 2012). and Mueang Pan District of Lampang province. Huay Hin Lad Unfortunately, there is a tendency to commoditize and Nai is approximately 17 kilometers from the Wiang Pa Pao commercialize indigenous ecological knowledge. In so doing District Office, 105 kilometers southwest of Chiang Rai city and the socio-cultural and ecological capitals are utilized as merely around 121 kilometers northeast of Chiang Mai city. a stepping stone to sell local cultural capital and organic Topographically, Huay Hin Lad Nai is classified as hill products. It becomes a world of production and not world of evergreen forest with an elevation of 800-1000 meters above people and their place. There is still little emphasis on sea level and within a mixed-deciduous forest, the leaf-shedding appreciation and “indwelling” in the local cultural and forest and thus there are various tree and plant species. ecological values. Biodiversity of the forest is still intact. A large portion of the Similarly, IEK sounds less developed and relies on intuitive village’s land is hilly terrain. Hin Lad is called according to the sense of a person. In fact, it is rather the living knowledge of the topological structure of the terrain and stream and near the dead and not the dead knowledge of the living. The significant watershed. There are 14 streams running in the region thus the point of concern is that the foundation of the indigenous ecological knowledge is simply embedded in the oral tradition water supply runs unceasingly in the community. and manifested in day-to-day life. Oral tradition is a traditional The climate at the location is pleasantly cool all year round transmission of knowledge among the indigenous communities. and rather cold in the cool season. Still the community is within In this way, it needs to revisit and renew it in order to be able to the tropical climate zone. Thus, summer lasts from February to utilize and transmit it to wider society as a way to coexist with May, the temperature is rather high yet with the ecosystem of nature. this green area and upland watershed, the place experiences a relatively pleasant climate. Rainy season usually lasts from May C. Ecotourism to October. In cool season, the temperature can drop lower than The International Ecotourism Society (TIES) is now defined 10 degrees Celsius. The climate is suitable to cool season plants ecotourism as “responsible travel to natural areas that conserves and flowers all year round as well. the environment, sustains the well-being of the local people, and The forest area is comprised of 10,954 Rai (1,753 ha.) and involves interpretation and education” (TIES, 2015). divided into two main functions. The first is the upland field and Ecotourism should ground its foundation on the promotion of residential areas around 1,228 Rai (196 ha. or 10 % of the total the indigenous ecological knowledge in their conservation, area) meant for basic consumptions such as house-building communities, and interpretation. In general, ecotourism wood, food growing, and agroforestry gardens. This area is promotes nature-based tourism activities, environmental preserved and forbidden to cut any trees or hunt any animals conservation, and contribution to economic benefits for local within the 1-km diameter and so a forest for cultural rituals and communities (Huang et al, 2015). It also serves as an alternative beliefs. The second area around 9,726 Rai (1,556 ha. or to mass tourism that promotes sustainable development for approximately 90%) is called a community forest and nature-and culture-based tourism (Kontogeorgopoulos et al., preservation area since it is the watershed. The area is used for 2013). To some extent, the form of ecotourism constitutes shifting cultivation (162 Rai or 26 ha.), tea cultivation as well as environment as the key tourism resource for natural-based upland rice farming (168 Rai or 27 ha.), and being protected and atmosphere, sustainability, educational process, and local not allowed to invade (CESD, 2013). participation (Diamantis, 2004). Demographically, Huay Hin Lad Nai is part of Moo 7 in Ban Unfortunately, the voluminous literature on ecotourism Pong sub-district with 107 people and 20 families but if suggests the disparity between the economic drive and symbolic including all three administrative units (Hin Lad Nai, Hin Lad

https://doi.org/10.17758/EAP.EPH517022 263 7th International Conference on Education, Humanities and Social Sciences Studies (EHSSS-17) May 2-3, 2017 at Pattaya (Thailand)

Nok, and Huay Sai Khao) is around 402 residents and 86 The target populations are indigenous Karen people including families (CESD, 2013). Only Huay Sai Khao is a Lahu ethnic the elders, the youth, and the house ladies or the mothers. community, the other two are Karen (Ban Pong sub-district All data from interviews, observations, and textual analysis Office, 2014). Huay Hin Lad Nai according to the Karen were documented structurally and processed in an organized tradition, when a man gets married, he has to move in to live fashion. A deductive qualitative approach to thematic analysis with the family of his spouse. For the last consecutive decades, in a narrative form was used to recap and conceptualize the the number of the population at Hin Lad Nai, has been almost results and findings by showing the relation between data and the same. Thus the community is relatively small and has less the attested indigenous ecological knowledge. The results human impact on forest provide a link between the values of Karen ethnoecology and B. Karen People. the local sustainable livelihoods in relation to biodiversity and articulate the local perception on the traditional knowledge as The term “Karen” or “Kariang” or “Yang” is used by the well as contributions of the indigenous worldview to ecotourism people outside the community, the Karen call themselves Pgaz development. K’Nyau which means “human person”. The Karen are indigenous people with their own culture. In this study, Karen is V. FINDINGS AND DISCUSSIONS referred to as Pgaz K’Nyau, and sometimes interchangeably used to mean the same group of people. There are an estimated A. The values of community indigenous ecological knowledge 400,000 Karen in Thailand, the largest ethnic minority in the (IEK) country. They prefer settling in valleys surrounded with At Huay Hin Lad Nai Karen community, the ground for evergreen forest, conifer forest, and mixed deciduous forest at human-forest relation is on We live in and benefit from forest, 400 m to 1200 m above sea level and riparian areas or water we need to take care of forest, and forest is our source of life. In meadows (Santasombat, 2004). There are many subgroups effect, the glimpse into the facet of authentic Karen within Karen ethnicity. Notably, the subgroups are ethnoecological knowledge emerges from this relation. Sandis distinguished by the color of their clothing and in Thailand the (2014) contended that indigenous knowledge is defined within main subgroup are the Sgaw and the Pwo or White Karen who the construction of the present and the interpretation of the past, shares the same ancestry as the Karen in the Karen State in and this can never happen if there is no relationship as a ground Myanmar. Nowadays, the Sgaw Karen are more populated than for socio-cultural and physical context. the Pwo in northern Thailand. In this study, the main focus is the Within the embrace of rich forest, the indigenous Karen have Sgaw Karen in northern Thailand. their own form of community forest management and the Since the early part of the last century, Pgaz K’Nyau community reckons as to how to manage their living space and communities and widely dispersed across Myanmar and producing land with their own ethnoecological knowledge. This northern and western part of Thailand, especially community has blended traditional agriculture—agroforestry as Myanmar-Thailand border (Graber, 2006; Hiyami and well as rotational farming-- with evergreen forest and pine forest Darlington, 2000). Pgaz K’Nyau has long history and unique along the hills. For agroforestry, the community does not single cultural identity, arts, traditions and rituals. In 19th century, the out nor reclaim the forest area for designated tea or coffee historical evidence was recorded by the British government plantations but instead integrates plantations into the forest. For officers and later American Missionaries on the life of Pgaz rotational farming, the community prioritizes only the needed K’Nyau and Mon. In present day Myanmar, this ethnic group is space though usually multiple fields for cultivation or “planting still fighting with the Burmese military for independence crops on the hill,” which rotates between short and long period (Trakarnsupakorn,1997; Luangaramsri, 2001). (7-10 years) for the land to recover itself. Furthermore, the The Pgaz K’Nyau are indigenous to the hills and plains and so traditional rituals and belief characterize how they relate prefer to build their settlement in the midst of hill forests, respectfully with nature and acknowledge their place in it valleys and plains, along the streams, and lowlands in mainly without claiming ownership but instead stewardship. the provinces of Tak, Mae Hong Son, and Chiang Mai ( Hiyami The traditional knowledge of the Karen has helped preserve & Darlington, 2000). There is also evidence that Karen have the biodiversity of the forest and ecological system for several been in Thailand since 600-700 years ago. years. For instance, the shifting cultivation or swidden agriculture is underpinned by recent researches that this process IV. METHODOLOGY benefits earth’s biodiversity with an alteration of fallow periods This study utilizes a qualitative method which allows the where the land is left to its recovery stage of fertility exploratory narrative to examine the intangible value of the (Trakansuphakon, 1997). The indigenous knowledge of ethnological knowledge, the main focus of this study. The choosing soil and preserving watershed is also paramount to approach is chosen due to dynamic ethnic culture, ecological their wellbeing (Hiranwong, 2003). All theses have been knowledge, and feelings of villagers as well as the interplay fabricated as the Karen local wisdom of human-forest between the awareness local and non-local experiences. To relationship or in shorts livelihood-based forest of the Karen support the qualitative findings, observations, document (Delang & Wong, 2006). Caring for forest is an integral part that analysis, in-depth interviews, and focus group discussions are the community perceives paramount and takes ardent primarily utilized. In-depth interviews as well as focus group responsibility to nurture the natural surrounding as its source of discussions will provide more accurate collective reflections. life. This has changed some misunderstandings about the ethic

https://doi.org/10.17758/EAP.EPH517022 264 7th International Conference on Education, Humanities and Social Sciences Studies (EHSSS-17) May 2-3, 2017 at Pattaya (Thailand)

Karen in which they have been perceived as victims of (UN), the awardee as a representative for the entire community deforestation. to celebrate the fruit of their conscientious effort to care for forest. B. Local consciousness and preservation of Karen traditional knowledge C. Community perception of tourism development Considering themselves as the people of forest, the Karen In recent years, the values of Karen traditional knowledge at perceive humans and nature as part of the same holistic diversity Hin Lad Nai community have become known to several groups (Luangaramsri 2001; Tomforde, 2003). The local way of life of visitors. Sharing with visitors is one of the main tasks that the has led to self-sufficiency and sustainable livelihoods, and community has been doing for some time. When asked about resolute socio-cultural identity. This becomes local tourism, they are of the opinion that they are open to it with self-consciousness of their presence in forest. The community caution and discretion. However the overall interviews, tourism tries to maintain with the same prospect in the mindset of the is perceived as a threat to the environment and to the indigenous youth. Jiao et al. (2011) wrote that “[if the young believe] they community. The growing concern is the sustainable and are an integral part of the natural landscape or that they are environmentally friendly approach to tourism especially to the spiritually connected to the flora and fauna that sustained their ethnic communities in northern Thailand where more and more forebears,” (p.260) the traditional practices will remain alive. activities are now taking place. The influx of people in mass Such self-awareness of the people in this community indicates tourism does more harm than good to the ecotourism that how animators (local residents) are truly able to appreciate destinations. their traditions, and find appropriate means to embody them. The community rejects any external dominant imposition on Interesting self-awareness really dictates cultural assumption, the community economic benefits and the type of inner determinants, experience and competences to act and just-looking-around or traipsing mentality visitors with no continue to live out the living tradition of the ancestors. Though human interaction. The authenticity or real-life experience is the tradition is not fixed and ready-made product of value but still significant here and the locals will not dilute it to mere invented through time to help the locals adapt themselves to staged display for the visitors since it is contrary to their way of their environment (Santasombat, 2013). Obligation as a result life and might lead to conflicts and dissatisfaction among the becomes self-imposed duties to face the changing reality within locals (Simons & De Groot, 2015). the environments in which they happen to act. In shorts, the visitors have to blend into the life of the locals, The Karen community is an oral tradition community. The and not vice versa. Thus, the community cautions about oral tradition is a means of socio-cultural transmission that is “tourism” because this might eventually alter the socio-cultural bridging the generation gaps and other ethnic rituals which and environmental landscape in the community; and tendency to carries a lot of ethnoecological wisdom from the older rely too much on tourism can also arise. Above all, the local generation to the younger generation (Boonlue, 2002). The participation in decision-making and involvements cannot be youth here point out that the transmission comes in two ways: omitted. The community prefers a type of educational and theory and praxis. For theory is about stories, legends, folktales, transformative tourism where the community is a venue for and etc. that teach and inculcate the values of life and living; for knowledge exchange and learning encounter. Stronza & praxis is simply learning by doing. This has been characterized Durham (2008) affirmed that ecotourism works best when it through their way of living. Besides, the knowledge and the builds on the local knowledge since ecotourism is unique and process of thinking is transmitted through practical means they grounded on educational and interpretive value. The Huay Hin do together as a way of teaching by doing and learning by doing. Lad Nai community has chosen to position itself as an For instant, the youth are working with their parents in the field exchanging encounter destination that is in line with the local every time possible. Such local way of life has led to rhythm and socio-cultural community activities for the visitors self-sufficiency and sustainable livelihoods, and resolute to experience the local ethnoecological knowledge. socio-cultural identity. Lastly, exchange of the traditional knowledge on forest As a result of the interviews, the elder informants are guarding and securing the source of food and of life can lead to generally satisfied with the community youth since many of better understanding and recognition of the people in the them return to the community and make their living within the mountains. The constant building right understanding with the community through traditional knowledge and skills. The people outside the community is also important through community pride rests on how the community can self-generate knowledge exchange and negotiation with the local authority. some income from a surplus on top of what the community The new mutual understanding should foster the strengthening needs. of local wisdom, identity, and the nourishing of diversity in For decades, the community elders have been spearheading society. the good practices based on the interrelation of people and forest, because the Forestry laws are insufficient to care for VI. CONCLUSION forest (Luangaramsri, 2001; Santasombat, 2013) without true The Karen community at Huay Hin Lad Nai not only aims at awareness and deep relation with the forest. In return, good self-sufficiency as well as self-dependence but also proves to practice of caring for forest has earned the community the Green outsiders that indigenous or traditional way of living does Globe Award, the global certification for sustainable tourism in benefit the forest where they have long lived. Focusing on an 1999 for a decade (1999-2008). In 2013 the title “Forest Hero” was given to one of the local scholars by the United Nation indigenous perspective, the community offers to relook at the

https://doi.org/10.17758/EAP.EPH517022 265 7th International Conference on Education, Humanities and Social Sciences Studies (EHSSS-17) May 2-3, 2017 at Pattaya (Thailand) human-forest relation as an integral part of the local [18] Trakansuphakon, P. “Transmission of the body of knowledge socio-cultural and environmental landscape for sustainable relating to the shifting cultivation system of Karen communities,” Unpublished Master’s thesis, Chiang Mai University, (in Thai). 1997. living and wellbeing in a harmonious way. This relation [19] Nakashima, D., Prott, L. & Bridgewater, P. Tapping into the world’s becomes a basis for local consciousness and philosophical wisdom, UNESCO Sources, 125, July-August, 12, 2000. worldview in preserving the values of indigenous ecological [20] Casagrande, D. (2012). Ethnoecology. Available http://www.eoearth.org/view/article/152681 knowledge along with skills and passing them on to the younger [21] Huang, C.-C., Liang, W.-Y., Tseng, T.-L., & Wong, R.-Y. (April 2015). generation as well as sharing and exchanging with the A rough set-based corporate memory for the case of ecotourism. community visitors who are interested in their traditional Tourism Management. 47. pp. 22-33. Available doi:10.1016/j.tourman.2014.09.004 livelihoods. The community welcomes visitors on its own terms [22] Institute for Environmental Sciences and Technology (2016). and under the guidance of community regulations. The Ethnoecology laboratory. Available http://icta.uab.cat/Etnoecologia/ community still prioritizes the socio-cultural values over [23] The International Ecotourism Society [TIES] (2015). What is monetary gain. Thus, the external domination from outside to Ecotourism? Available http://www.ecotourism.org/what-is-ecotourism appropriate traditional ecological knowledge runs contrary to the will of the local people. Accordingly, visitors must comply to the rhythm of the community as a basic requirement to visit the rural village at Huay Hin Lad Nai. This is what the Karen community not only contributes to ecotourism but also to society’s consciousness of how the indigenous community can harmoniously live with nature for decades, what we can learn from them, and how to let the local community decisions take precedence over other concerns or benefits. VII. REFERENCES [1] Boonlue, V.... “Cultural capital and struggle for symbolic power of a Pgaz k'nyau community” (Unpublished master's thesis). Chiang Mai University 2002. [2] Brightsmith, D. J., Stronza, A., & Holle, K. “Ecotourism, conservation biology, and volunteer tourism: A mutually beneficial triumvirate,” Biological Conservation, vol. 141, no.11, pp. 2832-2842, September 2008. [3] Chao, C.-L., & Hsu, P.-H. “Learning about the development of eco-tourism in the context of the Smangus tribe's traditional ecological

knowledge,” GeoJournal of Tourism and Geosites, vol. 7, no.1, pp.7-21, May 2011. [4] Delang, C. O., & Wong, T. “The livelihood-based forest classification system of the Pwo Karen in western Thailand,” Mountain Research and Development, vol. 26, no.2, pp. 138-145, May 2006. [5] Jiao, Y., Li, X., Liang, L., Takeuchi, K., Okuro, T., Zhang, D., & Sun, L. “Indigenous ecological knowledge and natural resource management in the cultural landscape of China’s Hani Terraces,” Ecological Research, vol. 27, no.2, pp. 247-263, March 2012. [6] Kontogeorgopoulos, N., Churyen, A., & Duangsaeng, V. “Homestay tourism and the commercialization of the rural home in Thailand,” Asia Pacific Journal of Tourism Research, vol. 20, no.1, pp. 29-50, November 2013. [7] Simons, I. & De Groot, E. “Power and empowerment in community-based tourism: Opening Pandora’s box?” Tourism Review, vol.70, no.1, pp. 72 – 84, April 2015. [8] Tomforde, M. “The global in the Local: Contested resource-use systems of the Karen and Hmong in northern Thailand,” Journal of Southeast Asian Studies, vol. 34, no.2, pp. 347–360, June 2003. [13] Santasombat, Y. Biodiversity Local Knowledge and Sustainable Development, 2nd ed., RCSD Chiang Mai University. 2013. [14] Stronza, A., & Durham, W. H. (Eds.). Ecotourism and conservation in the Americas. Wallingford, UK: CABI. 2008. [15] Rao, V.L.N., & Ramana, G.V. Indigenous knowledge, conservation and management of natural resources among primitive tribal groups of Andhra Pradesh, In V. Bhasin & M.K. Bhasin (Eds). Anthropology today: Trends, scope and applications (pp.129-134), New Dehli: Kamla-Raj Enterprises, 2007. [16] Sandis, C. (Ed.). Cultural heritage ethics: Between theory and practice. Cambridge: Open Book Publishers, 2014. [17] Hiranwong, T. “Transfer of indigenous knowledge in ecology of Karen people in the area of Inthanon National Park,” (Unpublished Independent Study). Chiang Mai University, Chiang Mai, Thailand, 2003.

https://doi.org/10.17758/EAP.EPH517022 266